I have mentioned Nash to the Caps a few times. Johansson is definitely one of the pieces I would require as the return. Based on what the Rangers supposedly offered (yeah, yeah, confirmed by a beat writer.....) the package to get Nash would have to be closer to Johansson, Galiev, Orlov and a 1st. I would certainly add Mayorov to that deal or a pick going the other way but I just don't see Johansson and Brouwer as enough especially with Brouwer's impending UFA status.
I think the deal offered by the Rangers and the deal we've put together hear speaks to how difficult it is to make a deal like this happen.
I think your proposal could happen if WASH goes deep this spring, but doesn't get adequate play from Semin, thus making WASH entertain upgrading him (ie: Nash). However, if they do go deep, you'd have to think that Johansson and Orlov have played a large part in that happening.
On the flipside, if WASH absolutely flops in the playoffs, you'd have to think they'll want to make changes (Semin, Hamrlik, Laich, etc) and replace these parts with a mini-rebuild. If that happens then why would they want to move so many quality assets for one piece?
I'm using WASH as an example, but you could really list any team in this scenario.
you make that sound like a bad thing.. mackinnon would be the best! that would be such a nice and quick rebuild.
Nice and quick rebuild? Two first round picks later, Oil is still at the bottom. I don't see Mackinnon and whomever we get this draft equaling or bettering EDM's last several drafts.
The 2013 draft is looking so much better than this group (but last year, no one thought that but injuries have taken a large toll). MacKinnon may not even go first. He just has the most hype due to the Crosby comparisons (which aren't exactly accurate). There's also Anthony Duclair, Elias Lindholm, Sasha Barkov, Hunter Shinkaruk. This could be one of the best crop of forwards in years and players that would go ahead of Yakupov is they were eligible this year.
The trade in 2002 to get Nash was Florida trading the 1st overall to Columbus for the 3rd overall and the option to switch first-round picks in 2003. That ended up for nothing since Florida ended up drafting higher than the Jackets in 2003. Atlanta also go something to keep them from taking Bouwmeester.
Would the Oilers consider a trade like that? Swap picks in 2012 with the option to swap picks again in 2013?
The Oilers would be betting that they do better than the Jackets in 2013.
If a team is going to tank, 2013 seems like a better year to do it in. Now, that could all change if all the top prospects end up injured again, but it's looking crazy good. That's why it would be stupid to use the LA pick in 2012.
I've really come to terms with picking #2. What's done is done. The most important thing now is for the Jackets to thoroughly vet each of the top 5 candidates.
If Nail is the best choice (and I'm not 100% convinced), we still have a chance to get him. If Edmonton really wants Murray, they don't have a lot of leverage. If they start inquiring about moving down, you make damn sure that it's leaked that you are taking Murray so they know they can't get him if they try to move back to #3 or #4. The goal is to force them to trade with us, and pick up an equitable asset, or go off the board and take him at #1.
I feel Edmonton pretty much has to take Nail, or they'll trade back and someone else will take him #1. So, if Nail doesn't top our list, we'll likely get who we want anyway.
I've really come to terms with picking #2. What's done is done. The most important thing now is for the Jackets to thoroughly vet each of the top 5 candidates.
If Nail is the best choice (and I'm not 100% convinced), we still have a chance to get him. If Edmonton really wants Murray, they don't have a lot of leverage. If they start inquiring about moving down, you make damn sure that it's leaked that you are taking Murray so they know they can't get him if they try to move back to #3 or #4. The goal is to force them to trade with us, and pick up an equitable asset, or go off the board and take him at #1.
I feel Edmonton pretty much has to take Nail, or they'll trade back and someone else will take him #1. So, if Nail doesn't top our list, we'll likely get who we want anyway.
With Murray being the #2 prospect overall it would not be a stretch for the Oilers to take him #1 overall and Nail would slide to us (think Houston passing on Bush to select Mario Williams). This is a legit scenario and potentially likely.
What I don't get is (a let me remind you I am not an NHL scout) when you look at Forsberg's stats it is more than stellar in Jr or in Tier 2 Swedish elite league (not even the top league) so even among his peers is he killing it. I mean that all the top prospects kill it at Jr. level and avg at least 1pt/game, but Forsberg is not even 0.5 pt/gm. If he can not dominate with guys his own age how can he dominate in the NHL? Perhaps in 3-4 years, but we won't/can't wait that long for a guy to develop. I think we take BPA, but who is that Grigs/Gal/Forsberg?? Who knows. I say take Grigs and hope he turns out to be Malkin! I can see in a season or 2 everybody on here saying oh I wish we drafted such and such!
Nice and quick rebuild? Two first round picks later, Oil is still at the bottom. I don't see Mackinnon and whomever we get this draft equaling or bettering EDM's last several drafts.
I think its different, just b/c we have a symbolance of a defense where as EDM really doesn't...so our picks of Offense may have a bigger impact b/c of our Defense...and hopefully new Goalie
but I'm also on board with the REALLY out there idea of Johan and 16th for 1st overall, and Nash for 5th and Schenn and taking Nail, Galchenyuk, and Forsberg...I mean we can't bust on all three, can we??? lol
What I don't get is (a let me remind you I am not an NHL scout) when you look at Forsberg's stats it is more than stellar in Jr or in Tier 2 Swedish elite league (not even the top league) so even among his peers is he killing it. I mean that all the top prospects kill it at Jr. level and avg at least 1pt/game, but Forsberg is not even 0.5 pt/gm. If he can not dominate with guys his own age how can he dominate in the NHL? Perhaps in 3-4 years, but we won't/can't wait that long for a guy to develop. I think we take BPA, but who is that Grigs/Gal/Forsberg?? Who knows. I say take Grigs and hope he turns out to be Malkin! I can see in a season or 2 everybody on here saying oh I wish we drafted such and such!
Forsberg is one of the youngest players in the draft. He's not NHL ready and you don't draft so you can add a player immediately to the roster. He likely won't be making an impact in the NHL for 2-3 years.
Last season playing for Leksand's U20 Junior team as a 16 year old, he had 21 goals and 19 assists in 36 games which is what really put him on the map. For Leksand's U18 team, he had a goal and 5 assists in 3 games. This season, he only filled in on the junior teams and saw limited ice time. It's seen as not fair when teams play their senior A-level players on junior teams.
Forsberg has dominated when playing in U18 tournaments. This season so far: 5 goals, 3 assists in 8 games. At the WJC (U20) he was seeing limited ice time and was the youngest player on Team Sweden.
He's held his own playing for Leksand in Allsvenskan (this is one of the top teams in the league and is battling to be promoted to the Elite League). It's also the same team that produced Oliver Ekman-Larsson.
Only 5 players in Allsvenskan this season averaged over 1 point per game. It's not a high scoring league (neither is the SEL). Scoring .5/game at age 17 is quite an accomplishment.
Curious as to a 3 team trade where the framework is TOR would get Nash, EDM would get #5 and #18(Our LA pick), we end up with #1, MPS, TOR 2013 1st. Once again this is a FRAMEWORK of a trade, so obviously more pieces would be moved around.
I just thing the fact we end up with the #1(Yakupov) and #2(Murray/Galchenyuk) pick would be our Sedin twins moment, plus we just upped our chances at #1 next year with TOR pick
EDM now could take Trouba/Reinhart at 5, maybe even Olli Matta at 18 so they now have young "elite" talent at the blue line to match what they have up front.
TOR once again gives up high picks for a player(gotta love Burke), but they bring the local boy home.
Curious as to a 3 team trade where the framework is TOR would get Nash, EDM would get #5 and #18(Our LA pick), we end up with #1, MPS, TOR 2013 1st. Once again this is a FRAMEWORK of a trade, so obviously more pieces would be moved around.
I just thing the fact we end up with the #1(Yakupov) and #2(Murray/Galchenyuk) pick would be our Sedin twins moment, plus we just upped our chances at #1 next year with TOR pick
EDM now could take Trouba/Reinhart at 5, maybe even Olli Matta at 18 so they now have young "elite" talent at the blue line to match what they have up front.
TOR once again gives up high picks for a player(gotta love Burke), but they bring the local boy home.
I kinda like it. Would be cool to just get Galchenyuk and Yakupov together somehow
After years of seeing posters disregard prospects from Scandinavia because of their stats, it gets rather annoying. Put things in perspective for a second: players are NOT handled the same way over there. There's a hierarchy of sorts. Hypothetically, imagine if Forsberg, as a 17 year old was playing in the AHL (just for the sake of argument). Scoring ~.5ppg would seem feasible, and he'd probably get more playing time in doing so. Look at how most Swedes or Finns are brought along and you won't notice many differences in the way they're treated. A fatal flaw among armchair scouts is stat watching. Scouting is more or less about observation – seeing how guys react in certain situations that relate to NHL play, not just their highlights (which is why youtube compilations are a dangerous way to judge a player... I could compile the highlights of a guy pegged to go in the 6th round, but if I told you he was slated to go in the first, the highlights would rub off on you in a deceiving way).
With that said, I'm not too sure if Forsberg is the right pick FOR US, even though I like the player a lot. The attractive thing about him is that he may have the highest ceiling in the draft, but he will need to be allowed to develop properly, which is not exactly our strong suit. He'd be my third choice behind Murray and Galchenyuk.
After years of seeing posters disregard prospects from Scandinavia because of their stats, it gets rather annoying. Put things in perspective for a second: players are NOT handled the same way over there. There's a hierarchy of sorts. Hypothetically, imagine if Forsberg, as a 17 year old was playing in the AHL (just for the sake of argument). Scoring ~.5ppg would seem feasible, and he'd probably get more playing time in doing so. Look at how most Swedes or Finns are brought along and you won't notice many differences in the way they're treated. A fatal flaw among armchair scouts is stat watching. Scouting is more or less about observation – seeing how guys react in certain situations that relate to NHL play, not just their highlights (which is why youtube compilations are a dangerous way to judge a player... I could compile the highlights of a guy pegged to go in the 6th round, but if I told you he was slated to go in the first, the highlights would rub off on you in a deceiving way).
With that said, I'm not too sure if Forsberg is the right pick FOR US, even though I like the player a lot. The attractive thing about him is that he may have the highest ceiling in the draft, but he will need to be allowed to develop properly, which is not exactly our strong suit. He'd be my third choice behind Murray and Galchenyuk.
Yeah, I agree. Look at the Europeans under MacLean and even those under Howson, Kubalik, as is a guy like Kirill Starkov under MacLean is a great example... This organization lacks the ability to properly develop the guys that actually come over here. Developing these players is more difficult than developing North Americans, and this organization is pretty bad at it. I'm starting to think unless we can swap with Edmonton for a reasonable price and take the only guy thats expected in Yakupov, I think we need to deal the pick.
Assuming Yakupov goes #1, what is the general consenus on who you guys will select? Grigorenko? Forsberg? Galchenyuk? Murray?
Trying to get a feel for hwo will be available when the Habs pick.
Since our opinion matters little to Howson and Company, our consensus will mean little to your endeavor.
There is a growing sentiment towards Murray, however, I think I remember reading something about Howson and a rumored link to Forsberg (correct me I'm wrong people).
There is every possibility we don't pick #2.
Frankly I don't think you will get any clear direction based on our answers. Sorry.
Yeah, I agree. Look at the Europeans under MacLean and even those under Howson, Kubalik, as is a guy like Kirill Starkov under MacLean is a great example... This organization lacks the ability to properly develop the guys that actually come over here. Developing these players is more difficult than developing North Americans, and this organization is pretty bad at it. I'm starting to think unless we can swap with Edmonton for a reasonable price and take the only guy thats expected in Yakupov, I think we need to deal the pick.
